As Tony Parrish & Professor Chucklebutty have pointed out before, one of the few remaining proper hacks at the Oldham Echo is David Bartlett, whose Daily Post blog (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/ ) is worth reading. It's therefore a pity to see Bartlett penning the sort of Echo piece which, typically for the paper, eshews journalism for shallow marketing & hype (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/03/12/now-it-s-official-liverpool-is-on-the-up-and-up-100252-23128483/ ).
It seems the city fathers are to re-brand Liverpool in the wake of culture year:
"The news was revealed at the annual MIPIM conference in Cannes on the French Riviera by the city's development agency Liverpool Vision.
"It came as new research revealed how the city is now a very different place in the eyes of the UK following its successful Capital of Culture year."
Note the use of the word "revealed", thus conveying a bogus sense of drama & news value.
It gets better, or worse, if you get my drift; Bartlett pens this almost surreal passage about the city:
"[Liverpool] is no longer perceived to be part of the 'north', and instead is seen as a unique location in its own right alongside places like Edinburgh that have carved out a distinct identity.
"And negative notions like the Militant Tendency, poor industrial relations and unemployment have started to dwindle, according to the data."
One can only surmise that the state of basic geography teaching in schools is seriously amiss if Liverpool is not "perceived to be part of the 'north' ". Additionally, what's all this crap about Militant being a negative notion? Say what you like about Militant, but one thing it certainly wasn't was a notion. The claim that unemployment is starting to "dwindle", just as the biggest slump in the best part of a century kicks in (check out those increasingly empty spaces in Liverpool One) is fanciful, to say the least.
The article states there will be a new logo "and a vision for Liverpool until 2024" from 26th March, leading Bartlett to gush:
"The research was commissioned by Liverpool Vision to ensure the success of Capital of Culture was used as a launch pad for greater things."
(Suppose these findings had not been so rosy. Do you think they would have got the Oldham Echo to splash with the story?)
The methodology employed for the findings is, however, very much open to question; those questioned for this "research" were selected "via a combination of focus groups and online interviews". Focus groups? Online interviews? Where were these focus groups assembled? It wouldn't happen to be, ooh, Merseyside, would it, David? As for the online interviews, we all know about the trolls out there, don't we?
But wait, it isn't milk & honey all the way for the future of the city:
"Although the research was overwhelmingly positive, some businesses regarded Liverpool as a difficult place to operate, which is complex, not outward looking enough, and with too much politicking."
That note of dissention, as you'd expect, comes way down Bartlett's otherwise feel-good piece, which is startlingly similar in tone & content to the blurb on Liverpool Vision's website (http://www.liverpoolvision.co.uk/ ).
An Echo editorial seized on Bartlett's article (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2009/03/12/much-done-much-to-do-100252-23128034/ ):
"It's official - Liverpool is the new Edinburgh!"
No, really. It goes on rather surreally:
"Instead of being seen as an archetypal stronghold of decay and dissatisfaction, Liverpool is associated with passion, spirit and big investment. And it's up there with Edinburgh and York as a cool destination."
Of course, no-one doubts the city's passion & spirit. But big investment? In the heat of the credit crunch & a global recession?
The Echo editorial contradicts itself in the final paragraph when it thunders rhetorically:
"Because regeneration isn't about research and logos - it's about stretching, meaningful targets and real progress towards them."
Er, hang on, wasn't Bartlett's puff-piece predicated on the glitzy launch of a new city logo? Is the Echo celebrating it even though it doesn't see it as a catalyst for regeneration?
More muddled thinking on Old Hall Street, I fear.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query david bartlett. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query david bartlett. Sort by date Show all posts
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Kennedy To Cut & Run?
David Bartlett today observes on his blog that Labour's Liverpool Wavertree MP Jane Kennedy is set to quit her post as environment minister (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/06/wavertree-mp-jane-kennedy-on-t.html ).
Bartlett refers to a story in today's Sunday Times in which Kennedy is named as one of two female junior ministers who are about to jump from the sinking ship (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6446324.ece ).
Bartlett also asks us to remember that Kennedy "first came to prominence in fighting the Militant Tendency in Labour. Some would say there are direct comparisons in the manner in which Militant operated and the so-called cabal that runs the government."
Such "comparisons" are lazy in the extreme. Whatever Militant's shortcomings may have been, & whatever your view may be of those years, it should be noted that Brown's "cabal" is slowly disintegrating, something that didn't happen to Militant; democratic centralism, for all its faults, ensured that.
Kennedy has been Telegraphed, it should be said. According to the paper (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5349413/MPs-expenses-Full-list-of-Labour-MPs-investigated-by-the-Telegraph.html ):
"Jane Kennedy [Labour, Liverpool Wavertree] regularly claimed £400 a month for food, as well as £200 for telephone bills and £200 for service and maintenance on her second home, a flat in Lambeth."
The reference David Bartlett made to Kennedy's role in Liverpool Labour politics during the 80s reminds me of an episode from that time which speaks volumes about her willingness, or otherwise, to try & justify the claims she made. The Labour Party NEC voted in favour of an inquiry into the running of the Liverpool District Labour Party (DLP) in the wake of the expulsions in 1985. Peter Taafe & Tony Mulhearn recall:
"On the very first day of the inquiry, the Sun reported: 'Shock 150 page blast at Militant'. This dossier had been drawn up by Jane Kennedy and the NUPE leadership in Liverpool probably with the connivance of the union leadership at national level. Jane Kennedy was more than eager to detail the alleged 'crimes' of the Liverpool District Labour Party in the safety of the inquiry's private sessions.
"When the leaders of the District Labour Party appeared at the inquiry, they were given an assurance that they would be allowed to question their accusers and the 'evidence'. When this was revealed to Jane Kennedy by reporters, she was alarmed and threatened to withdraw the 'dossier'. The inquiry was a show trial." ("Liverpool: A City That Dared To Fight", p.356, by Peter Taafe and Tony Mulhearn, Fortress Books, first edition January, 1988).
Bartlett refers to a story in today's Sunday Times in which Kennedy is named as one of two female junior ministers who are about to jump from the sinking ship (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6446324.ece ).
Bartlett also asks us to remember that Kennedy "first came to prominence in fighting the Militant Tendency in Labour. Some would say there are direct comparisons in the manner in which Militant operated and the so-called cabal that runs the government."
Such "comparisons" are lazy in the extreme. Whatever Militant's shortcomings may have been, & whatever your view may be of those years, it should be noted that Brown's "cabal" is slowly disintegrating, something that didn't happen to Militant; democratic centralism, for all its faults, ensured that.
Kennedy has been Telegraphed, it should be said. According to the paper (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5349413/MPs-expenses-Full-list-of-Labour-MPs-investigated-by-the-Telegraph.html ):
"Jane Kennedy [Labour, Liverpool Wavertree] regularly claimed £400 a month for food, as well as £200 for telephone bills and £200 for service and maintenance on her second home, a flat in Lambeth."
The reference David Bartlett made to Kennedy's role in Liverpool Labour politics during the 80s reminds me of an episode from that time which speaks volumes about her willingness, or otherwise, to try & justify the claims she made. The Labour Party NEC voted in favour of an inquiry into the running of the Liverpool District Labour Party (DLP) in the wake of the expulsions in 1985. Peter Taafe & Tony Mulhearn recall:
"On the very first day of the inquiry, the Sun reported: 'Shock 150 page blast at Militant'. This dossier had been drawn up by Jane Kennedy and the NUPE leadership in Liverpool probably with the connivance of the union leadership at national level. Jane Kennedy was more than eager to detail the alleged 'crimes' of the Liverpool District Labour Party in the safety of the inquiry's private sessions.
"When the leaders of the District Labour Party appeared at the inquiry, they were given an assurance that they would be allowed to question their accusers and the 'evidence'. When this was revealed to Jane Kennedy by reporters, she was alarmed and threatened to withdraw the 'dossier'. The inquiry was a show trial." ("Liverpool: A City That Dared To Fight", p.356, by Peter Taafe and Tony Mulhearn, Fortress Books, first edition January, 1988).
Friday, July 30, 2010
Losing His Balance
"Professor" Redmond's off on his holidays. Well, I suppose he's earned it. After all, playing the fawning sychophant for "Dave" Cameron must be tiring. It means that we're denied his pearls of wisdom in the Daily Ghost for a few weeks. However, there's no need to fret, David Bartlett has stepped in to fill the void, as he informs us on his, erm, blog (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2010/07/daily-post-column-walking-the.html ).
The result? A seamless continuation of the exceptional prose & insight which normally graces that column.
Bartlett looks at the Liverpool Waters debacle & tries to maintain a distinctly neutral stance on the issue (the piece, after all, is titled, "Walking the World Heritage Site tight rope"). Alas, Bartlett's high wire act comes to grief when, in attempting not to upset Peel Holdings, he goes so far as to plug its case:
"Peel, one of the biggest landowners in the North West, is seen by many as the great hope for regenerating north Liverpool -- long identified as not having benefited as much as it could or should have from the city's wider renaissance."
So Peel is "seen by many" as the catalyst for north Liverpool's regeneration, is it? If "by many", Bartlett is referring to a small clump of self-important, self-appointed experts around the vicinity of Oldham Hall Street, I suppose that's fair comment. It is, however, a distortion of the reality. The risible notion that Kirkdale, Walton & other blighted areas of the north end can be transformed by a wave of Peel's magic wand should be shoved off Bartlett's tight rope immediately. In addition, "the city's wider renaissance" is a phenomenon largely confined to the city centre itself; the leafier parts of the city's south end have always been more affluent than the north end.
As Redmond recovers from his self-promoting exertions, he can be pleased to know that Bartlett's high wire act is morphing into a clown routine.
The result? A seamless continuation of the exceptional prose & insight which normally graces that column.
Bartlett looks at the Liverpool Waters debacle & tries to maintain a distinctly neutral stance on the issue (the piece, after all, is titled, "Walking the World Heritage Site tight rope"). Alas, Bartlett's high wire act comes to grief when, in attempting not to upset Peel Holdings, he goes so far as to plug its case:
"Peel, one of the biggest landowners in the North West, is seen by many as the great hope for regenerating north Liverpool -- long identified as not having benefited as much as it could or should have from the city's wider renaissance."
So Peel is "seen by many" as the catalyst for north Liverpool's regeneration, is it? If "by many", Bartlett is referring to a small clump of self-important, self-appointed experts around the vicinity of Oldham Hall Street, I suppose that's fair comment. It is, however, a distortion of the reality. The risible notion that Kirkdale, Walton & other blighted areas of the north end can be transformed by a wave of Peel's magic wand should be shoved off Bartlett's tight rope immediately. In addition, "the city's wider renaissance" is a phenomenon largely confined to the city centre itself; the leafier parts of the city's south end have always been more affluent than the north end.
As Redmond recovers from his self-promoting exertions, he can be pleased to know that Bartlett's high wire act is morphing into a clown routine.
Friday, July 27, 2012
From Catalyst To Cock-Up Merchant
Paddy's fawning article (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/in-the-mix/2012/07/16/behind-the-scenes-joe-anderson-liverpool-s-first-elected-mayor-100252-31401115/ ) quoted Joe as declaring, "When I go to David Cameron's mayoral committee I can speak powerfully -- having been elected by the people with a thumping big majority.
"And if we show competence and confidence in what we do we will be able to negotiate more and more powers."
As I said, let's gloss over that turnout figure of 31.7%, although Paddy, to be fair, does give it a mention. Moreover, it does seem a rather quaint notion that if Joe & Co. implement enough Tory cuts they'll be rewarded with "more and more powers" from a ConDem government which is notable, inter alia, for its centralising impulses.
Joe also exhibited a refreshing degree of modesty when asked by Paddy about his legacy: "It won't be one individual issue. I want people to remember the rebirth of the city. We've got a great past but an even better future. We have got so much to look forward to and I want people to say of me, 'He was the catalyst for the rebirth of the city'. "
Got that? Joe doesn't want much in the way of adulation, he just wants to be known as the "catalyst" for Liverpool's renaissance.
With that in the bag Joe had every reason to think that he really had Oldham Hall Street in his pocket. Er, no, he hadn't.
A series of embarrassing stories began to appear in the Oldham Echo, much to Joe's chagrin & he made clear his unhappiness about it, as noted by David Bartlett (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2012/07/liverpool-mayor-joe-anderson-h.html ).
It wasn't meant to be like this for Joe. He needed the best possible spin as he implemented the Tory cuts he insisted he himself loathed. Anything rather than the reality of a future for cities like Liverpool which holds out the demeaning prospect of hand-outs at food banks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/18/food-banks-on-hand-outs ).
Joe's mood wouldn't have been lightened by the revelation that security for the Mathew Street Festival will be supplied by those reliable chaps at G4S (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/07/19/olympic-security-fiasco-firm-g4s-will-provide-crowd-control-at-mathew-street-festival-100252-31425415/ ).
Perhaps it was the Olympic link, allied to a sense of grievance which prompted Joe to tweet a little message in the direction of the capital earlier today. Realising that it didn't exactly reflect well on both his office of mayor & the city he likes to champion to a wider audience, Joe deleted it. Ah, but wait. The web can be an unforgiving place. Deleted tweets can return to haunt you just when you think all is well & said tweet has now been preserved for less than noble posterity. Warning: it does contain a good old Anglo-Saxon term as well as a piece of shoddy grammar: https://p.twimg.com/Ayz-UY8CYAEOYLX.jpg .
It isn't clear what Joe was referring to when expressing the hope that London didn't, well, make a mess of things. However, it could be a reference to culture year, something Joe & his cohorts have always insisted was an unalloyed success. Or perhaps it could be a reference to the civic disfigurement of Liverpool's waterfront that Joe has shamelessly championed.
Whatever it refers to, one thing is certain: Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson has said far more about himself in one deleted tweet than in a whole series of sycophantic pieces in the Oldham Echo.
21.10 UPDATE: David Bartlett is reporting that a member of staff in Joe Anderson's office has been suspended over the deleted tweet (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2012/07/liverpool-council-employee-sus.html ).
If someone else did, ahem, compose the offending tweet, it would certainly explain matters. However, it does raise the question of online authorship. Does Mayor Anderson always instruct his staff to tweet in his name? If so, it still reflects badly on the mayor. Twitter, like Facebook, is supposed to be about self-expression & openness, not PR.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Someone's Knocking At The Door
How else to account for the Phoenix-like ascent of Warren "War Zones" Bradley. How else to explain a dogged determination (to use a cliche he himself might employ) to return to the stage (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2012/01/leaflet-warren-bradley-confirm.html).
As David Bartlett notes, Bradley has printed & distributed election leaflets, declaring his candidacy for the Wavertree ward (the recycling bins in L15 will be busy, I suspect).
All nice & jolly, to be sure. However, there's a snag. Well, there's quite a few, actually, but let's focus on the most pressing one for the friend of a convicted felon (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/09/councillor-steve-hurst-steps-down-good.html). You see, Warren isn't a Fib Dem candidate. He hasn't been selected. He has, however, been "selected" as an Independent candidate. I know, strange, isn't it? Then again, it's of a piece with Bradley's occasional connection to political reality. Even David Bartlett, a veritable Mr Sobersides, can't disguise his surprise:
"It is likely to get him expelled from the Liberal Democrats, as it's against party rules to stand against an official candidate, once the police investigation is over.
"The only curious element about his latest leaflet is how an independent candidate can be 'selected' to stand as a candidate."
How indeed.
Perhaps he was "selected" by his partner, the disgraced Facebooking ex-Fib Dem councillor Sharon Green, who jumped ship as it took on another few hundred gallons of water last May (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/05/06/liverpool-lib-dem-sharon-green-defects-and-becomes-independent-100252-28648062/).
Be that as it may, Warren's undaunted. Oh yes, he is, delaring on his leaflet, "Beware of smears". He elaborates thus:
"Local residents should be aware that other political parties have in the past engaged in smearing individuals. Warren Bradley is well aware of this and pledges not to engage in such practice, sadly we believe others won't be as honest."
So it seems that when the city of Liverpool told Warren to sling his hook & not come back (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2011/04/so-long-its-been-good-to-know-you.html) he mistook a city's jeers for cheers.
Has any one got the heart to tell him?
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Close The Door After You
It would be tempting to remark that the rats are leaving the sinking ship. However, I suspect that would be a vile slur on the rodent population. Be that as it may, many others will probably make that comment (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/09/08/sir-trevor-jones-to-stand-down-from-liverpool-council-100252-24632954/ & http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/09/08/convicted-liberal-democrat-councillor-steve-hurst-to-stand-down-100252-24632956/ ).
Wayne's already waved a cheery goodbye to the dubious duo with a couple of pertinent points about their tenure & track record (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/09/councillor-steve-hurst-steps-down-good.html & http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/09/trevor-jone-steps-down-good-riddance.html ).
Turning first to the criminal, David Bartlett reports that Hurst will wait until next May before taking his leave. It would have been nice to bid him an immediate exit, but it seems that like many a discredited MP in the Westminster expenses scandal, he is happy to hold on to the bitter (& sour) end. The piece relates:
"The ECHO understands Cllr Hurst became fed up with the press coverage and the fact the issue would not go away."
Clearly the criminal's chutzpah hasn't been diminished by the opprobrium rightly meted out to him.
In attempting to put a veneer of political respectability on one of the most tawdry affairs in Liverpool local government (& that's saying something!), the Lib Dems only succeeded in digging the hole that little bit deeper. Step forward & take a bow, Colin Eldridge. Cllr Eldridge churned out a statement which seems to say everything about the Lib Dems' warped sense of ethics:
"[Hurst] has been an absolutely first class councillor for the people of Wavertree ward and prior to that Church ward.
"For all the people he has helped he will be a loss to the community. I wish him well in his endeavours in future."
Cllr Eldridge's effusive torrent of political effluent may well come back to haunt him, seeing as he is due to stand as the Lib Dem candidate for the Wavertree seat at the next election (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2009/09/08/liberal-democrat-stakes-it-all-on-race-for-liverpool-wavertree-constituency-92534-24630500/ ).
Turning to the man who was happy to chomp on a cigar while surveying the city's waterfront from a Mersey ferry boat with Michael Heseltine after the Toxteth riots in 1981, David Bartlett's article is terse to the point of Twittering, leading one to suspect that a short five-sentence press release has been, yet again, reheated on Oldham Hall Street & served up to the readers.
Perhaps it's due to Cllr Jones' willingness to resort to the lawyers (or rather a certain prominent Liverpool lawyer) to make his point.
Adding to the civic brain-drain from the Town Hall is Nadia Stewart. Cllr Stewart, representing Croxteth ward, defected from Labour to the Lib Dems at the time of the 2008 local elections, keeping her new friends in power (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2008/05/turncoat-in-toytown.html ).
The Post's piece on Cllr Eldridge's Westminster ambitions added that "more prominent councillors are expected to announce they are standing down in the coming weeks."
The exodus has begun.
*Photograph of Cllr Bradley & his motley crew of ne'er-do-wells courtesy of the Liverpool Subculture blog.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Elected To (Self) Serve
I seem to have attracted the attention of a New Labour troll with my post on Stephen Twigg becoming the party's candidate in West Derby. "Anonymous" (what an original web moniker!) is of the view that this blog is "ill-informed". When a New Labour minion throws that one out, I have to smile.
I suppose it isn't easy to hold on to the Third Way in these times, what with one thing after another. Overlooked, largely, in the last few days has been the departure of Derek Draper from the LabourList website (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/06/derek-draper-labour-list-editor ).
Certainly, Stephen Twigg's website sheds a little more light on the circumstances surrounding his guest post on David Bartlett's Dale Street Blues blog (http://www.twigg4westderby.com/guest-blog-on-dale-street-blues ):
"Thanks to David Bartlett, now of the Post and Echo who kindly asked me to produce a guest blog for the Dale Street Blues.
"I've chosen to write my blog on how new propopals from the Government to reduce speed limits have once again drawn attention to the numbers of unnecessary lives lost and people injured on our roads."
"Anonymous" also stated that Twigg had already bought a property in Liverpool by way of his commitment to the area. He/she didn't say whether the property was in the constituency itself. Some might think that a minor quibble. After all, you don't have to live in the constituency you represent (Terry Fields continued to live in Bootle while serving as Broadgreen's MP). Nor is it intended to be a parochial point -- Eric Heffer was an outstanding constituency MP for Walton over three decades, despite the fact that he originally hailed from Hertfordshire (http://www.archiveshub.ac.uk/news/0403eh.html ). However, if the property is in, say, Mossley Hill or Woolton, it's still a different environment from many of the wards making up West Derby.
Twigg's page features a map of the newly redrawn boundaries of the West Derby constituency. The redrawn seat includes Tuebrook, Croxteth & Norris Green; a long way from leafy Enfield in North London suburbia.
At the time of Twigg's selection for the seat, Susan Press, vice-chair of the Labour Representation Committee, expressed her dismay at the news & commented that "parachuting Twigg into a constituency in such a manner is cynical, unnecessary and typical shenanigans of a kind we have had far too much of in recent years. There must surely have been a wealth of local candidates who would have been more appropriate....." (http://grimmerupnorth.blogspot.com/2007/09/stephen-twigg-selected-in-west-derby.html ).
Moreover, one commenter on Press' post recalls an occasion which may be of interest to those in West Derby & elsewhere who couldn't or wouldn't pay Thatcher's Poll Tax:
"I remember Twigg being lambasted at NUS [National Union of Students] conference in 1989 for telling delegates he would pay his poll tax. Scottish students booed him off the stage.
"He was a right-wing fool then and still is."
Twigg was seen by many on election night in 1997 as personifying New Labour. How ironic that he hopes to re-enter Parliament when the Augean stables of Westminster are being exposed as rarely before (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2009/may/08/labour-cabinet-mps-expenses-claims ).
It adds insult to injury when one considers the glaring failure of New Labour to address what was, Blair & co. declared, a top priority, inequality (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/08/poverty-equality-britain-incomes-poor ).
It is a failing roundly dissected & excoriated by Larry Elliot (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/07/inequality-poverty-labour ):
"It's not that difficult to analyse what has happened. Labour inherited one of the west's most unequal societies from the Conservatives in 1997 and, far from reversing the trend, it has allowed the gap between rich and poor to widen.
"A deregulated and de-unionised economy meant the sky was the limit for those at the top, but downward pressure on wages for those at the bottom.
"During Labour's first two terms, there was at least some positive gloss that could be put on the inequality figures. It wasn't that the incomes of the poor were going down, merely that the incomes of the rich were going up more rapidly."
The last few days have seen more details emerge about the bubble which MPs, not just those in the New Labour camp, inhabit; it's not often that I side with the Daily Telegraph (in fact, I think it's a first), but the question of how they received the expenses figures is irrelevant when set against the decadent, Bourbonesque excesses they reveal. It is therefore either an astonishing act of political chutzpah, or a jaw-dropping act of naivety for cabinet minister Caroline Flint to appear in today's Observer displaying different fashion outfits, & posing in a way designed to make her look like a 50s femme fatale (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/may/10/caroline-flint-uk-politics ), particularly when her own actions in the Great Westminster Expenses Scam were featured by the Telegraph on Friday (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5293149/Caroline-Flint-claimed-14000-for-fees-for-new-flat-MPs-expenses.html ).
This is the demi-monde to which Stephen Twigg hopes to return next year. Good Luck, Stephen. Oh, & you, too, "Anonymous".
I suppose it isn't easy to hold on to the Third Way in these times, what with one thing after another. Overlooked, largely, in the last few days has been the departure of Derek Draper from the LabourList website (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/06/derek-draper-labour-list-editor ).
Certainly, Stephen Twigg's website sheds a little more light on the circumstances surrounding his guest post on David Bartlett's Dale Street Blues blog (http://www.twigg4westderby.com/guest-blog-on-dale-street-blues ):
"Thanks to David Bartlett, now of the Post and Echo who kindly asked me to produce a guest blog for the Dale Street Blues.
"I've chosen to write my blog on how new propopals from the Government to reduce speed limits have once again drawn attention to the numbers of unnecessary lives lost and people injured on our roads."
"Anonymous" also stated that Twigg had already bought a property in Liverpool by way of his commitment to the area. He/she didn't say whether the property was in the constituency itself. Some might think that a minor quibble. After all, you don't have to live in the constituency you represent (Terry Fields continued to live in Bootle while serving as Broadgreen's MP). Nor is it intended to be a parochial point -- Eric Heffer was an outstanding constituency MP for Walton over three decades, despite the fact that he originally hailed from Hertfordshire (http://www.archiveshub.ac.uk/news/0403eh.html ). However, if the property is in, say, Mossley Hill or Woolton, it's still a different environment from many of the wards making up West Derby.
Twigg's page features a map of the newly redrawn boundaries of the West Derby constituency. The redrawn seat includes Tuebrook, Croxteth & Norris Green; a long way from leafy Enfield in North London suburbia.
At the time of Twigg's selection for the seat, Susan Press, vice-chair of the Labour Representation Committee, expressed her dismay at the news & commented that "parachuting Twigg into a constituency in such a manner is cynical, unnecessary and typical shenanigans of a kind we have had far too much of in recent years. There must surely have been a wealth of local candidates who would have been more appropriate....." (http://grimmerupnorth.blogspot.com/2007/09/stephen-twigg-selected-in-west-derby.html ).
Moreover, one commenter on Press' post recalls an occasion which may be of interest to those in West Derby & elsewhere who couldn't or wouldn't pay Thatcher's Poll Tax:
"I remember Twigg being lambasted at NUS [National Union of Students] conference in 1989 for telling delegates he would pay his poll tax. Scottish students booed him off the stage.
"He was a right-wing fool then and still is."
Twigg was seen by many on election night in 1997 as personifying New Labour. How ironic that he hopes to re-enter Parliament when the Augean stables of Westminster are being exposed as rarely before (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2009/may/08/labour-cabinet-mps-expenses-claims ).
It adds insult to injury when one considers the glaring failure of New Labour to address what was, Blair & co. declared, a top priority, inequality (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/08/poverty-equality-britain-incomes-poor ).
It is a failing roundly dissected & excoriated by Larry Elliot (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/07/inequality-poverty-labour ):
"It's not that difficult to analyse what has happened. Labour inherited one of the west's most unequal societies from the Conservatives in 1997 and, far from reversing the trend, it has allowed the gap between rich and poor to widen.
"A deregulated and de-unionised economy meant the sky was the limit for those at the top, but downward pressure on wages for those at the bottom.
"During Labour's first two terms, there was at least some positive gloss that could be put on the inequality figures. It wasn't that the incomes of the poor were going down, merely that the incomes of the rich were going up more rapidly."
The last few days have seen more details emerge about the bubble which MPs, not just those in the New Labour camp, inhabit; it's not often that I side with the Daily Telegraph (in fact, I think it's a first), but the question of how they received the expenses figures is irrelevant when set against the decadent, Bourbonesque excesses they reveal. It is therefore either an astonishing act of political chutzpah, or a jaw-dropping act of naivety for cabinet minister Caroline Flint to appear in today's Observer displaying different fashion outfits, & posing in a way designed to make her look like a 50s femme fatale (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/may/10/caroline-flint-uk-politics ), particularly when her own actions in the Great Westminster Expenses Scam were featured by the Telegraph on Friday (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5293149/Caroline-Flint-claimed-14000-for-fees-for-new-flat-MPs-expenses.html ).
This is the demi-monde to which Stephen Twigg hopes to return next year. Good Luck, Stephen. Oh, & you, too, "Anonymous".
Friday, March 27, 2009
Exhuming The Culture Company's Corpse
Those hoping that all the mindless marketing hype from 08 has gone into history could be disappointed. Mindful of culture year's demise, the city council & assorted associates seemingly wish to perpetuate the impression that 2008 was just the start of a glorious future for Liverpool; if Trotskyites are chided for believing in the concept of permanent revolution, the city council should be similarly upbraided for their faith in permanent re-launches (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7965303.stm ).
The BBC report that there is a 15-year plan to turn Liverpool into "a thriving international city".
Mmm, yes, do go on:
"Its aims include creating thousands of jobs, increasing the population by building more family homes and improving health."
Later on in the Beeb's account the marketing types get to mangle the English language:
"Mike Taylor, director for investment and enterprise at Liverpool Vision, said, 'The new brand builds on the £300m of recognition created by 08 and it represents a focal point for a shared vision for the future growth of the city.' "
Keen to join in the renewed orgy of back-slapping & civic onanism, the Daily Post wades in:
http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2009/03/26/liverpool-reveals-new-vision-to-become-a-thriving-international-city-92534-23235447/ .
David Bartlett story goes into more detail, giving, by Trinity Mirror standards, a ream of statistics to chew on. However, it all adds up to a packaged wish-list, not a clear, costed plan. It ranges from the laudable (education & employment skills, improving the local environment) to the frankly Utopian (making Liverpool one of the top five shopping destinations in the UK, aiming for less than 10% of the city's population to smoke).
City council leader Warren Bradley is in bullish mood:
"Fundamentally, it is about making a step change for everybody in the city, not just the vulnerable, but everybody.
"Too many of our people are without the skills necessary to get a job and we have massive challenges to overcome in regard to poor health."
As Joe Anderson, leader of the Labour group on the city council, notes, the aims are clearly commendable, but the Devil is in the detail.
Colin Hilton, city council Chief Executive, is also quoted:
"We are actually going to compete internationally and grow ourselves.
"We are not saying that as an aspiration, but signing up to a plan to get to that destination.
"For example, we know we need to attract more businesses, at least another one-third more."
Bradley's use of the term "step change" makes the whole enterprise sound like a work-out at the gym rather than a long-term strategy. Hilton doesn't elaborate, unfortunately, on how a city can grow itself.
On his Dale Street Blues blog David Bartlett is keen to highlight the new logo which accompanies the launch (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/03/liverpools-new-logo.html#more ):
"It will be freely available for all businesses, organisations and individuals to use.
"The logo forms the basis of rebranding Liverpool as a sparky city that is on the up."
Sparky? On the up? Oh dear.
An altogether welcome note of scepticism is provided by How-Do in its coverage (http://www.how-do.co.uk/north-west-media-news/north-west-marketing-services/liverpool-brand-launches-today-with-%27predictable%27-city-skyline-identity-200903265007/ ):
"The new logo has been shrouded in mystery, with the few privy to a preview being sworn to secrecy.
"One disgruntled insider, though, told How-Do: 'Predictably the logo depicts a Liverpool city skyline viewed from the waterfront.'
"They continued: 'There was going to be an accompanying strap-line reading: "Alive with Imagination", but this has been dropped due to a pretty poor reception from everyone unfortunate enough to have seen it.' "
Since How-Do published its piece the logo has been unveiled, & it's right, the logo is, to this admittedly inexpert eye, cliched, unoriginal & slightly jaded looking (www.liverpoolcitybrand.com ). The image of the waterfront, the sort of thing that's been sketched, drawn & photographed so many times down the years, is bathed in blue. It looks like the sort of thing Banksy would have sprayed on a bad day.
How-Do also reveals how the brand was originally given over to the Finch Partnership company in the city "without it going out to pitch". After the resulting furore Liverpool Vision relented, allowing the second stage of the process to go to competitive tender.
Various local celebs & business figures were at the launch to show their support for the logo & campaign, including Cream boss James Barton & The Zutons' saxophonist Abi Harding. However, one prominent local figure was seemingly conspicuous by his absence, according to How-Do:
"One former advocate said to be missing from today's line-up is Phil Redmond, the self-appointed 'Mr Liverpool' .
"Redmond is believed to have 'taken his bat and ball home' following disagreements over the future direction of the Liverpool brand. Redmond was said to favour greater continuity with the city's 2008 cultural positioning."
Lord Redmond frozen out, eh? Tony, Professor, over to you.
The BBC report that there is a 15-year plan to turn Liverpool into "a thriving international city".
Mmm, yes, do go on:
"Its aims include creating thousands of jobs, increasing the population by building more family homes and improving health."
Later on in the Beeb's account the marketing types get to mangle the English language:
"Mike Taylor, director for investment and enterprise at Liverpool Vision, said, 'The new brand builds on the £300m of recognition created by 08 and it represents a focal point for a shared vision for the future growth of the city.' "
Keen to join in the renewed orgy of back-slapping & civic onanism, the Daily Post wades in:
http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2009/03/26/liverpool-reveals-new-vision-to-become-a-thriving-international-city-92534-23235447/ .
David Bartlett story goes into more detail, giving, by Trinity Mirror standards, a ream of statistics to chew on. However, it all adds up to a packaged wish-list, not a clear, costed plan. It ranges from the laudable (education & employment skills, improving the local environment) to the frankly Utopian (making Liverpool one of the top five shopping destinations in the UK, aiming for less than 10% of the city's population to smoke).
City council leader Warren Bradley is in bullish mood:
"Fundamentally, it is about making a step change for everybody in the city, not just the vulnerable, but everybody.
"Too many of our people are without the skills necessary to get a job and we have massive challenges to overcome in regard to poor health."
As Joe Anderson, leader of the Labour group on the city council, notes, the aims are clearly commendable, but the Devil is in the detail.
Colin Hilton, city council Chief Executive, is also quoted:
"We are actually going to compete internationally and grow ourselves.
"We are not saying that as an aspiration, but signing up to a plan to get to that destination.
"For example, we know we need to attract more businesses, at least another one-third more."
Bradley's use of the term "step change" makes the whole enterprise sound like a work-out at the gym rather than a long-term strategy. Hilton doesn't elaborate, unfortunately, on how a city can grow itself.
On his Dale Street Blues blog David Bartlett is keen to highlight the new logo which accompanies the launch (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/03/liverpools-new-logo.html#more ):
"It will be freely available for all businesses, organisations and individuals to use.
"The logo forms the basis of rebranding Liverpool as a sparky city that is on the up."
Sparky? On the up? Oh dear.
An altogether welcome note of scepticism is provided by How-Do in its coverage (http://www.how-do.co.uk/north-west-media-news/north-west-marketing-services/liverpool-brand-launches-today-with-%27predictable%27-city-skyline-identity-200903265007/ ):
"The new logo has been shrouded in mystery, with the few privy to a preview being sworn to secrecy.
"One disgruntled insider, though, told How-Do: 'Predictably the logo depicts a Liverpool city skyline viewed from the waterfront.'
"They continued: 'There was going to be an accompanying strap-line reading: "Alive with Imagination", but this has been dropped due to a pretty poor reception from everyone unfortunate enough to have seen it.' "
Since How-Do published its piece the logo has been unveiled, & it's right, the logo is, to this admittedly inexpert eye, cliched, unoriginal & slightly jaded looking (www.liverpoolcitybrand.com ). The image of the waterfront, the sort of thing that's been sketched, drawn & photographed so many times down the years, is bathed in blue. It looks like the sort of thing Banksy would have sprayed on a bad day.
How-Do also reveals how the brand was originally given over to the Finch Partnership company in the city "without it going out to pitch". After the resulting furore Liverpool Vision relented, allowing the second stage of the process to go to competitive tender.
Various local celebs & business figures were at the launch to show their support for the logo & campaign, including Cream boss James Barton & The Zutons' saxophonist Abi Harding. However, one prominent local figure was seemingly conspicuous by his absence, according to How-Do:
"One former advocate said to be missing from today's line-up is Phil Redmond, the self-appointed 'Mr Liverpool' .
"Redmond is believed to have 'taken his bat and ball home' following disagreements over the future direction of the Liverpool brand. Redmond was said to favour greater continuity with the city's 2008 cultural positioning."
Lord Redmond frozen out, eh? Tony, Professor, over to you.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Corruption's Coming Home
It was only a matter of time before the Telegraph's daily list of errant MPs (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ ) featured local not so honourable members. Wirral South's Ben Chapman, for many an embodiment of New Labour, today announced he would be quitting at the next election after his, ahem, unorthodox arrangement on his mortgage (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8062408.stm ).
On his Dale Street Blues blog David Bartlett last week anticipated both the level of the scams perpetrated by most MPs & the public reaction. He also highlighted a hitherto unremarked aspect of the discrediting of Westminster, that of the loyal, dogged, perhaps naive political activist who suddenly has the scales removed from their eyes (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/05/why-im-so-angry-about-the-mps.html ):
"My blood has been boiling for some days now about MPs' expenses.
"This afternoon I spoke to a political party member who told me she had wept tears over this affair, because of the damage that had been done to her party and politics through this sordid episode."
Bartlett went on to call for the Speaker's head, something duly delivered the other day. In seeming anticipation of those local MPs who have & will be exposed by the Telegraph, Bartlett penned his accusatory prose:
"Being an MP should be a privilege, it is not a right. Yet some of these MPs have behaved like they had a divine right not only to hold office but to also pretty much fleece the taxpayer with complete impunity. They have spent months trying to keep these claims secret, secret from the very people that put them into their positions of privilege and pay the taxes that pay their wages and their expenses. Do I think all MPs are bent or on the make? No, but enough of them have abused the system to taint them all and our parliament."
The first Liverpool MP to be named was Garston's Maria Eagle, who claimed £3,500 towards the cost of a bathroom refurbishment at her Mossley Hill flat (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/05/birkenhead-mp-frank-field-star.html ). Eagle was one of those MPs to vote against their expenses falling under the Freedom of Information ambit. I also recall the days when she & her twin sister Angela, now the MP for New Brighton, were right-wing activists in the Crosby constituency; they sneered at Terry Fields when he pledged to take a worker's wage if elected. Terry Fields stuck to that pledge. Maria Eagle...well, you know the rest.
Speaking of Crosby, Bartlett yesterday noted that its MP, Claire Curtis-Thomas, had issued a pre-emptive mea culpa over her expenses (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/05/crosby-mp-claire-curtis-thomas.html ). Curtis-Thomas has yet to be Telegraphed, yet if she thinks that such an act of semi-contrition gets her off the hook with her own party membership & constituents, she'd better think again; interest in her case will only be increased by her statement. It's no secret that Crosby has been well-targeted by the Tories & that its candidate, Debi Jones --still best known for her days on BBC Radio Merseyside & her philistine utterances about Anthony Gormley's statues on the town's beach --was already primed to take the seat at the next election. It's instructive to recall that Curtis-Thomas spoke at her selection meeting about the poll tax. She expressed her sympathy for those who couldn't afford to pay it, but the law was the law. Pay up was her message. Affordability has never been an issue for someone on a basic salary of £64,000 per annum.
There's been disdain & hilarity in equal measure for Anthony Steen, Tory MP for Totnes in Devon, over his expenses (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8062447.stm ), "alleged by the Daily Telegraph to have claimed more than £87,000 over four years for his country house."
Steen ranted on BBC Radio Four's The World At One today: "What right does the public have to interfere with my private life? None."
While I'm delving into the past about certain figures now exposed for their mendacity, it would be remiss of me not to point out that Steen was the Tory MP for Liverpool Wavertree until 1979. As Thatcher swept into Downing Street, quoting St Francis of Assisi, Steen received his marching orders as Liverpool became a Tory-free zone. He fetched up in Devon at the 1983 election, muttering some none too complimentary sentiments about his former constituents. We still miss him up here, you know.
On his Dale Street Blues blog David Bartlett last week anticipated both the level of the scams perpetrated by most MPs & the public reaction. He also highlighted a hitherto unremarked aspect of the discrediting of Westminster, that of the loyal, dogged, perhaps naive political activist who suddenly has the scales removed from their eyes (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/05/why-im-so-angry-about-the-mps.html ):
"My blood has been boiling for some days now about MPs' expenses.
"This afternoon I spoke to a political party member who told me she had wept tears over this affair, because of the damage that had been done to her party and politics through this sordid episode."
Bartlett went on to call for the Speaker's head, something duly delivered the other day. In seeming anticipation of those local MPs who have & will be exposed by the Telegraph, Bartlett penned his accusatory prose:
"Being an MP should be a privilege, it is not a right. Yet some of these MPs have behaved like they had a divine right not only to hold office but to also pretty much fleece the taxpayer with complete impunity. They have spent months trying to keep these claims secret, secret from the very people that put them into their positions of privilege and pay the taxes that pay their wages and their expenses. Do I think all MPs are bent or on the make? No, but enough of them have abused the system to taint them all and our parliament."
The first Liverpool MP to be named was Garston's Maria Eagle, who claimed £3,500 towards the cost of a bathroom refurbishment at her Mossley Hill flat (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/05/birkenhead-mp-frank-field-star.html ). Eagle was one of those MPs to vote against their expenses falling under the Freedom of Information ambit. I also recall the days when she & her twin sister Angela, now the MP for New Brighton, were right-wing activists in the Crosby constituency; they sneered at Terry Fields when he pledged to take a worker's wage if elected. Terry Fields stuck to that pledge. Maria Eagle...well, you know the rest.
Speaking of Crosby, Bartlett yesterday noted that its MP, Claire Curtis-Thomas, had issued a pre-emptive mea culpa over her expenses (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/05/crosby-mp-claire-curtis-thomas.html ). Curtis-Thomas has yet to be Telegraphed, yet if she thinks that such an act of semi-contrition gets her off the hook with her own party membership & constituents, she'd better think again; interest in her case will only be increased by her statement. It's no secret that Crosby has been well-targeted by the Tories & that its candidate, Debi Jones --still best known for her days on BBC Radio Merseyside & her philistine utterances about Anthony Gormley's statues on the town's beach --was already primed to take the seat at the next election. It's instructive to recall that Curtis-Thomas spoke at her selection meeting about the poll tax. She expressed her sympathy for those who couldn't afford to pay it, but the law was the law. Pay up was her message. Affordability has never been an issue for someone on a basic salary of £64,000 per annum.
There's been disdain & hilarity in equal measure for Anthony Steen, Tory MP for Totnes in Devon, over his expenses (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8062447.stm ), "alleged by the Daily Telegraph to have claimed more than £87,000 over four years for his country house."
Steen ranted on BBC Radio Four's The World At One today: "What right does the public have to interfere with my private life? None."
While I'm delving into the past about certain figures now exposed for their mendacity, it would be remiss of me not to point out that Steen was the Tory MP for Liverpool Wavertree until 1979. As Thatcher swept into Downing Street, quoting St Francis of Assisi, Steen received his marching orders as Liverpool became a Tory-free zone. He fetched up in Devon at the 1983 election, muttering some none too complimentary sentiments about his former constituents. We still miss him up here, you know.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Home Truths
Warren Bradley's motley crew of ne'er-do-wells, chancers & arrivistes also has among its number Councillor Dave Irving. David Bartlett today reports that Irving, chairman of the planning committee on Liverpool City Council, has a home in Southport (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2009/05/28/liverpool-planning-chairman-in-southport-home-row-92534-23730886/ ).
Bartlett's report is liberally (pardon the pun) sprinkled with the words "allegedly" & "claimed", presumably to prevent Oldham Hall Street's lawyers from being called in.
However, it's notable that all Irving can say by way of response is that the Labour group hired private investigators to check out the story:
"Cllr Dave Irving, who represents Knotty Ash for the Liberal Democrats, claimed that the Labour Party had him followed."
That's not a denial then, is it?
[BTW, there's an alarming pattern here which the good Professor Chucklebutty should address: First, Cllr Paul "franking machine" Twigger & his risible Liverpool Piss-Up Day suggestion, now, Cllr Dave Irving & his Southport abode, both of whom misrepresent the good people of Knotty Ash. Professor, time for action!]
Bartlett outlines the legal position regarding this issue:
"Liverpool city council's solicitor Paul Evans has been asked by Labour to investigate the claims against Cllr Irving. Under council rules, candidates must have lived in the council area they are standing in for the whole of the previous 12 months at the time of nomination, or be registered as an elector for the council area in which they wish to stand or have worked in the area."
He also goes on to note that Irving won his ward last year by 35 votes. The term wafer-thin springs to mind.
So what does Irving actually have to say for himself, apart from accusing Labour of paying a private eye to follow him?
"I have listened to the Labour party go on about Steve Hurst [convicted of breaking election law] and making out they are whiter than white, far from it."
Is that it? No claim of media distortion, or innocent misunderstanding? Right, I see. When investigated, throw a peeved, petulant missive at your political opponents. Moreover, Irving's reference to Hurst merely serves to cement the Lib Dem's thoroughly warranted image as a corrupt & malign tumour in the city's body politic.
Wayne's already posted on the Irving case (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/05/david-irving-planning-chairman-caught.html ), touching on Irving's links with Trevor Jones & relating an intriguing exchange he had with the Southport, sorry, Knotty Ash councillor recently.
Professor Chucklebutty deals magisterially with the Hurst affair, as well as other recent events locally & nationally (http://profchucklebuttychronic.blogspot.com/2009/05/hurst-mercy-travel-last-event-in.html ). Professor, you're a star!
Bartlett's report is liberally (pardon the pun) sprinkled with the words "allegedly" & "claimed", presumably to prevent Oldham Hall Street's lawyers from being called in.
However, it's notable that all Irving can say by way of response is that the Labour group hired private investigators to check out the story:
"Cllr Dave Irving, who represents Knotty Ash for the Liberal Democrats, claimed that the Labour Party had him followed."
That's not a denial then, is it?
[BTW, there's an alarming pattern here which the good Professor Chucklebutty should address: First, Cllr Paul "franking machine" Twigger & his risible Liverpool Piss-Up Day suggestion, now, Cllr Dave Irving & his Southport abode, both of whom misrepresent the good people of Knotty Ash. Professor, time for action!]
Bartlett outlines the legal position regarding this issue:
"Liverpool city council's solicitor Paul Evans has been asked by Labour to investigate the claims against Cllr Irving. Under council rules, candidates must have lived in the council area they are standing in for the whole of the previous 12 months at the time of nomination, or be registered as an elector for the council area in which they wish to stand or have worked in the area."
He also goes on to note that Irving won his ward last year by 35 votes. The term wafer-thin springs to mind.
So what does Irving actually have to say for himself, apart from accusing Labour of paying a private eye to follow him?
"I have listened to the Labour party go on about Steve Hurst [convicted of breaking election law] and making out they are whiter than white, far from it."
Is that it? No claim of media distortion, or innocent misunderstanding? Right, I see. When investigated, throw a peeved, petulant missive at your political opponents. Moreover, Irving's reference to Hurst merely serves to cement the Lib Dem's thoroughly warranted image as a corrupt & malign tumour in the city's body politic.
Wayne's already posted on the Irving case (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/05/david-irving-planning-chairman-caught.html ), touching on Irving's links with Trevor Jones & relating an intriguing exchange he had with the Southport, sorry, Knotty Ash councillor recently.
Professor Chucklebutty deals magisterially with the Hurst affair, as well as other recent events locally & nationally (http://profchucklebuttychronic.blogspot.com/2009/05/hurst-mercy-travel-last-event-in.html ). Professor, you're a star!
Thursday, May 09, 2013
Deposed & Discredited, Warren Tweets His Defiance
It can be a lonely existence when you're a discredited former council leader. If people do listen to you, they won't take your words seriously. Former friends & colleagues turn away awkwardly if you approach them; they mutter something about being late for an appointment & having to dash. You're seen in the same way as one of those blokes in the corner of the pub who keep up a continuous, monotonous monologue, the half-empty pint glass keeping you company.
Such is the fate that has befallen Warren "War Zones" Bradley.
It's a far cry from the days when Warren could confidently claim that his leadership of Liverpool City Council represented a high water mark in the city's civic history & that the ConDem coalition would preserve & promote social justice (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/hes-still-there-you-know.html ):
"Social justice that Liberal Democrats believe in will be a golden vein that runs through the coalition government."
Alas, that "golden vein" was surgically removed from the coalition's anatomy at birth & no one informed Warren about it.
Also unwise was Warren's support for a convicted criminal (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2009/09/councillor-steve-hurst-steps-down-good.html ).
Nor did it help when Warren's grasp of local history failed him when he declared that the Three Graces dated from the Middle Ages (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOYvo7bdiOc ).
The city's Lib Dems, a shameless shower who would tolerate most things as long as they didn't get in the way of their bread & circus policies (remember our wonderful Capital of Culture celebrations?), were happy to have Warren in charge. Sure, he could be clumsy. Sure, he could be uninformed. However, he was, to quote Lenin, a useful idiot.
As the months & years moved on, though, Warren blabbed a little too freely & when he openly admitted that his legacy was a series of war zones across the city (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2010/04/warrens-war-zones.html ), his colleagues decided that enough was enough.
So you can see how Warren has become embittered & resentful. Liverpool politics can be an unforgiving environment, a jungle, even, & Warren found that he was easy prey.
But now he's biting back. Oh, yes, he is. According to David Bartlett today, Warren has taken to Twitter to snap back at those who so cruelly left him to the wolves (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2013/05/foul-mouthed-twitter-blast-on.html ).
One particular tweet, addressed to current Lib Dem leader Richard Kemp, is described as "foul-mouthed". Said tweet is certainly malevolent, but I wouldn't say it warrants the adjective Bartlett applies to it. It is, however, ungrammatical:
"@cllrkemp you're a complete tossa [sic], your quotes regarding Rosie just about sums [sic] you up. Once a dick, always a dick..."
The "Rosie" referred to in Warren's erudite missive is Rosie Jolly, a Lib Dem councillor who defected to Labour. Jolly's move, according to Bartlett, prompted Kemp to remark that "her efforts had been 'below what we expect of a Lib Dem councillor'."
Bartlett writes:
"The ECHO contacted Mr Bradley at 1.44pm to ask if he was responsible for the foul-mouthed tweet.
"But the former Lib Dem refused to answer, repeatedly saying, 'I don't know what you're talking about.' "
Sadly for Warren, as we've seen over the years, there are times when even he doesn't know what he is talking about. Warren's twitter feed, containg a series of incriminating tweets, can be found here: https://twitter.com/Wazza23666 .
Deserted, embittered & wounded, Warren takes aim at his sworn foes from the Twittersphere. It's so sad, isn't it?
Friday, June 12, 2009
Spin Over Substance?
The Oldham Echo's sickly sister the Daily Post today carries a piece by David Bartlett, stating that, despite taking up his new position as Health Secretary, Andy Burnham will continue to campaign for the release of all the original Hillsborough documents in their unaltered & unedited forms (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2009/06/12/andy-burnham-says-he-will-keep-fighting-for-release-of-secret-hillsborough-files-92534-23852136/ ).
I'm not calling into question Burnham's personal sincerity on the matter (those of us who attended the 20th anniversary memorial service at Anfield will readily attest to his own commitment on the issue), but it does read uncomfortably like yet another New Labour spin missive which Bartlett regurgitates faithfully. Pressure on the government to fulfill their pledge on the documents will, of course, continue, & Bartlett, to his credit, does mention the march on Parliament for justice over Hillsborough on Saturday June 20, linking to the march's website (http://www.m4j.co.uk/ ).
In the meantime, reminders of the need for movement on Hillsborough should be addressed to the new minister at the Department for Culture, Media & Sport, Ben Bradshaw (http://www.culture.gov.uk/contact_us/default.aspx ).
Bartlett's article repeats the ficticious claim that Burnham was "heckled" at the service in April:
"The Newton-le-Willows-born Everton fan, who was heckled at the recent Hillsborough memorial service at Anfield, has also revealed the way he was barracked was helpful because it helped 'lift the lid' off the feeling justice has still not been done.
"Mr Burnham said: 'The 20th anniversary service of Hillsborough was absolutely a difficult experience.
" 'If I was not a minister, I would have been shouting at the minister.' "
According to my mini-reference version of the Oxford Dictionary & Thesaurus, "heckle v interrupt (a public speaker) with aggressive questions and abuse."
Burnham's address was "interrupted" by the crowd, but not in an aggressive manner towards him personally (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z3mBIi084Q ).
I'm not calling into question Burnham's personal sincerity on the matter (those of us who attended the 20th anniversary memorial service at Anfield will readily attest to his own commitment on the issue), but it does read uncomfortably like yet another New Labour spin missive which Bartlett regurgitates faithfully. Pressure on the government to fulfill their pledge on the documents will, of course, continue, & Bartlett, to his credit, does mention the march on Parliament for justice over Hillsborough on Saturday June 20, linking to the march's website (http://www.m4j.co.uk/ ).
In the meantime, reminders of the need for movement on Hillsborough should be addressed to the new minister at the Department for Culture, Media & Sport, Ben Bradshaw (http://www.culture.gov.uk/contact_us/default.aspx ).
Bartlett's article repeats the ficticious claim that Burnham was "heckled" at the service in April:
"The Newton-le-Willows-born Everton fan, who was heckled at the recent Hillsborough memorial service at Anfield, has also revealed the way he was barracked was helpful because it helped 'lift the lid' off the feeling justice has still not been done.
"Mr Burnham said: 'The 20th anniversary service of Hillsborough was absolutely a difficult experience.
" 'If I was not a minister, I would have been shouting at the minister.' "
According to my mini-reference version of the Oxford Dictionary & Thesaurus, "heckle v interrupt (a public speaker) with aggressive questions and abuse."
Burnham's address was "interrupted" by the crowd, but not in an aggressive manner towards him personally (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z3mBIi084Q ).
Monday, September 28, 2009
Oldham Echo: Fight Arranger
Remember that kid at school who always went round telling one lad that another lad had said he could fight him? If things escalated, & they usually did from such an inflammatory starting-point, the two lads would end up rolling around while a group of other lads, led by the "shit-stirrer", would chant, "fight, fight, fight!" The two protagonists would end up getting the cane while the "shit-stirrer" would snigger at his antics. Well, the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo are journalism's "shit-stirrers" with their series of pieces designed to produce a hitherto non-existant spat between Liverpool & Southampton over the cruise ferry terminal affair (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/09/cruise-wars-scouse-wedding-at-sea.html ).
Using his blog to continue a ridiculous & totally irresponsible farce, David Bartlett adopts the role of a nine year-old boy engaged in a schoolground argument (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/09/cruise-wars-liverpool-vs-south.html) :
"Liverpool is the Capital of Pop. Our artists have produced more number one hits than those from any other town or city. The Beatles are our most famous export.
"Southampton's most famous musical export is probably Craig David - unless you count Benny Hill. He hit the top spot in 1971 with Ernie (Fastest Milkman in the West).
"Liverpool is the most filmed British city outside London with credits including: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Sherlock Holmes, 51st State, The Hunt For Red October, Nowhere Boy, In the Name of the Father, Letter To Brezhnev, Backbeat and Priest.
"The One Show once filmed a feature in Southampton called 'Why ice is slippy'. The city was the location for an HSBC training video.
"Liverpool FC are the most famous club in British history, with 18 league championships, five European cups, three UEFA cups, seven FA cups and seven league cups. Everton have competed in the top flight a record 107 seasons and won the league nine times, the FA Cup five times and a European trophy (Cup Winners Cup).
"Southampton FC have won the FA Cup. Once.
"Liverpool was the European Capital of Culture in 2008 and has been a UNESCO World Heritage City since 2004. The city has 2,500 listed buildings and 250 public monuments - including the largest collection of Grade II listed buildings outside London. Liverpool Cathedral is the largest in the country.
"Southampton has the world's oldest bowls green."
You can sit down now, David, & take a deep breath. Got to get your strength back for PE later, eh?
All three comments so far posted in response to Bartlett's na-na-na-na-na moment take him to task for reducing an already manufactured story by Oldham Hall Street to the level of a Year 5 playground exchange, with the Professor wondering whether Paddy Shennan [hello, Paddy!] actually penned the puerile piece. More seriously, the Professor warns that "this kind of exchange between cities can be so destructive so don't be surprised the next time some 'Scouser/Liverpudlian/Liverpolitan' gets bottled in a Southampton pub when they hear his accent, or some poor sod from Southampton gets battered here by a bunch of jingoistic morons, we need to think, is this the cultural level we wish to promote?"
Today's Oldham Echo tries to revive the "fight, fight, fight!" chant (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/09/28/liverpool-v-southampton-tax-rap-for-firm-in-pier-head-cruise-war-100252-24795007/ ), spinning on the tax status of ABP, owner of the Port of Southampton, saying it is registered in Jersey where Corporation Tax is zero per cent.
However, a commenter on the Echo story, willsonline, puts things in a more rounded context:
"Peel Holdings should be investigated - they were given Speke Airport on a plate, along with hundreds of acres of land - along with the Manchester Ship Canal. Granada TV exposed how they came about owning Trafford Park and fooling the people of Manchester into handing over the biggest trading estate in Europe for free, and it was all behind-the-scenes dealing that robbed the people of Manchester, and now it's happening in Merseyside, and lots of the profits are going offshore with Peel Holdings."
Peel Holdings' chairman & majority shreholder John Whittaker is a tax exile on the Isle of Man & is worth an estimated £1.3bn (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/09/cruise-wars-liverpool-gets-full-naval.html ).
Today's Oldham Echo editorial attempts to affect a disdainful position (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2009/09/28/southampton-cry-unfair-about-liverpool-s-cruise-liner-plan-what-a-damn-cheek-100252-24793991/ ):
"The cries of 'unfair' emanating from Southampton regarding Liverpool's perfectly reasonable bid for a turnaround facility at the Pier Head are becoming tedious and tiresome."
I'll tell you what's "tedious and tiresome", it's the juvenile antics of Oldham Hall Street over this & many other local topics.
The editorial again raises ABP's tax scam in Jersey, but is deafeningly silent on Peel Holdings & Whittaker.
An indication of the true nature of Peel Holdings can be found across the Irish Sea where workers in the Port of Dublin have been involved in a long-running dispute with a subsidiary of Peel, Maritime Terminals Ltd (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0704/1224250045706.html & http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0709/breaking50.html ):
"The union [Siptu] said that when the company [Marine Terminals Ltd] decided to make 19 staff members redundant earlier this year, it used its own selection criteria. Siptu said five workers were made redundant initially, and that on May 15th a further 14 were told by mangement that they were to be let go.
"On the same day, all other Siptu employees were written to, telling them they must sign new contracts agreeing to pay cuts of between 14 and 18 per cent, or be sacked, it said."
That's the nature of the beast Oldham Hall Street champions. Not just "tedious and tiresome", but disgusting.
Using his blog to continue a ridiculous & totally irresponsible farce, David Bartlett adopts the role of a nine year-old boy engaged in a schoolground argument (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/09/cruise-wars-liverpool-vs-south.html) :
"Liverpool is the Capital of Pop. Our artists have produced more number one hits than those from any other town or city. The Beatles are our most famous export.
"Southampton's most famous musical export is probably Craig David - unless you count Benny Hill. He hit the top spot in 1971 with Ernie (Fastest Milkman in the West).
"Liverpool is the most filmed British city outside London with credits including: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Sherlock Holmes, 51st State, The Hunt For Red October, Nowhere Boy, In the Name of the Father, Letter To Brezhnev, Backbeat and Priest.
"The One Show once filmed a feature in Southampton called 'Why ice is slippy'. The city was the location for an HSBC training video.
"Liverpool FC are the most famous club in British history, with 18 league championships, five European cups, three UEFA cups, seven FA cups and seven league cups. Everton have competed in the top flight a record 107 seasons and won the league nine times, the FA Cup five times and a European trophy (Cup Winners Cup).
"Southampton FC have won the FA Cup. Once.
"Liverpool was the European Capital of Culture in 2008 and has been a UNESCO World Heritage City since 2004. The city has 2,500 listed buildings and 250 public monuments - including the largest collection of Grade II listed buildings outside London. Liverpool Cathedral is the largest in the country.
"Southampton has the world's oldest bowls green."
You can sit down now, David, & take a deep breath. Got to get your strength back for PE later, eh?
All three comments so far posted in response to Bartlett's na-na-na-na-na moment take him to task for reducing an already manufactured story by Oldham Hall Street to the level of a Year 5 playground exchange, with the Professor wondering whether Paddy Shennan [hello, Paddy!] actually penned the puerile piece. More seriously, the Professor warns that "this kind of exchange between cities can be so destructive so don't be surprised the next time some 'Scouser/Liverpudlian/Liverpolitan' gets bottled in a Southampton pub when they hear his accent, or some poor sod from Southampton gets battered here by a bunch of jingoistic morons, we need to think, is this the cultural level we wish to promote?"
Today's Oldham Echo tries to revive the "fight, fight, fight!" chant (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/09/28/liverpool-v-southampton-tax-rap-for-firm-in-pier-head-cruise-war-100252-24795007/ ), spinning on the tax status of ABP, owner of the Port of Southampton, saying it is registered in Jersey where Corporation Tax is zero per cent.
However, a commenter on the Echo story, willsonline, puts things in a more rounded context:
"Peel Holdings should be investigated - they were given Speke Airport on a plate, along with hundreds of acres of land - along with the Manchester Ship Canal. Granada TV exposed how they came about owning Trafford Park and fooling the people of Manchester into handing over the biggest trading estate in Europe for free, and it was all behind-the-scenes dealing that robbed the people of Manchester, and now it's happening in Merseyside, and lots of the profits are going offshore with Peel Holdings."
Peel Holdings' chairman & majority shreholder John Whittaker is a tax exile on the Isle of Man & is worth an estimated £1.3bn (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/09/cruise-wars-liverpool-gets-full-naval.html ).
Today's Oldham Echo editorial attempts to affect a disdainful position (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2009/09/28/southampton-cry-unfair-about-liverpool-s-cruise-liner-plan-what-a-damn-cheek-100252-24793991/ ):
"The cries of 'unfair' emanating from Southampton regarding Liverpool's perfectly reasonable bid for a turnaround facility at the Pier Head are becoming tedious and tiresome."
I'll tell you what's "tedious and tiresome", it's the juvenile antics of Oldham Hall Street over this & many other local topics.
The editorial again raises ABP's tax scam in Jersey, but is deafeningly silent on Peel Holdings & Whittaker.
An indication of the true nature of Peel Holdings can be found across the Irish Sea where workers in the Port of Dublin have been involved in a long-running dispute with a subsidiary of Peel, Maritime Terminals Ltd (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0704/1224250045706.html & http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0709/breaking50.html ):
"The union [Siptu] said that when the company [Marine Terminals Ltd] decided to make 19 staff members redundant earlier this year, it used its own selection criteria. Siptu said five workers were made redundant initially, and that on May 15th a further 14 were told by mangement that they were to be let go.
"On the same day, all other Siptu employees were written to, telling them they must sign new contracts agreeing to pay cuts of between 14 and 18 per cent, or be sacked, it said."
That's the nature of the beast Oldham Hall Street champions. Not just "tedious and tiresome", but disgusting.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Oldham Echo: Fight Arranger-Round Two
Some people just don't know when to stop, do they? To take a typically cringeworthy pun employed by the Oldham Echo in relation to Flo Clucas' "Long & Winding Road" suggestion from Whitechapel to Matthew Street [more of A Short Walk Round The Corner, if you ask me], it simply isn't possible for some to Let It Be [sorry].
David Bartlett clearly wishes to resurrect the playground spat between Liverpool & Southampton (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/10/latest-missive-in-the-cruise-w.html ):
"I have been criticised in some quarters for responding to Gareth Lewis from the Southern Daily Echo after he suggested that Liverpool wanted to steal Southampton's cruise trade.
"I wrote a defence of Liverpool and pointed out Liverpool's achievements compared to Southampton.
"This was taken as me acting as some sort of stirrer or agent provocateur in the so-called 'cruise wars' between Liverpool and Southampton."
Criticism from "some quarters", David? I presume you're referring to this blog & Wayne's, whose response to your post decisively disabuses you of any illusion that your comments command unanimous local assent (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/10/cruise-wars-scouse-wedding-on-sea.html ).
Furthermore, what you posted could hardly be described as "a defence of Liverpool", the "achievements" you cite relating to football (irrelevant to the matter in hand) &, yes, of course, The Beatles (equally irrelevant to this topic). Instead, it reminded me of a playground rant from a peeved primary school pupil, as I noted at the time (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/09/oldham-echo-fight-arranger.html ).
In addition, I did not accuse you of being a "stirrer or agent provacateur", I levelled that charge at your employer on Oldham Hall Street, & given the enthusiasm with which both the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo have returned to this story recently, I see no reason to withdraw it.
You can hardly be surprised that a local columnist in Southampton has reacted by trotting out all the old Scouse stereotypes, nor should you feign offence taken at it; every town & city has its local propagandists whose egos are in inverse proportion to their IQ, Southampton is no exception.
In Liverpool's case, David, they tend to be fellow employees of yours.
You conclude your post by asking:
"So what form should a response take?"
The answer, David, is that there should be no response, as Ronnie de Ramper comments on your post. Acknowledge the fact that Oldham Hall Street deliberately engineered a confrontation via its reporting & headlines when the issue first arose, & augmented it with pathetically parochial editorials once the flames had been kindled.
It would be refreshing if Oldham Hall Street posed some pertinent journalistic enquiries on the role of Peel Holdings & held its record up to a sufficiently rigorous level of scrutiny. How about it, David?
Or are you just going to Let It Be?
David Bartlett clearly wishes to resurrect the playground spat between Liverpool & Southampton (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/10/latest-missive-in-the-cruise-w.html ):
"I have been criticised in some quarters for responding to Gareth Lewis from the Southern Daily Echo after he suggested that Liverpool wanted to steal Southampton's cruise trade.
"I wrote a defence of Liverpool and pointed out Liverpool's achievements compared to Southampton.
"This was taken as me acting as some sort of stirrer or agent provocateur in the so-called 'cruise wars' between Liverpool and Southampton."
Criticism from "some quarters", David? I presume you're referring to this blog & Wayne's, whose response to your post decisively disabuses you of any illusion that your comments command unanimous local assent (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/10/cruise-wars-scouse-wedding-on-sea.html ).
Furthermore, what you posted could hardly be described as "a defence of Liverpool", the "achievements" you cite relating to football (irrelevant to the matter in hand) &, yes, of course, The Beatles (equally irrelevant to this topic). Instead, it reminded me of a playground rant from a peeved primary school pupil, as I noted at the time (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/09/oldham-echo-fight-arranger.html ).
In addition, I did not accuse you of being a "stirrer or agent provacateur", I levelled that charge at your employer on Oldham Hall Street, & given the enthusiasm with which both the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo have returned to this story recently, I see no reason to withdraw it.
You can hardly be surprised that a local columnist in Southampton has reacted by trotting out all the old Scouse stereotypes, nor should you feign offence taken at it; every town & city has its local propagandists whose egos are in inverse proportion to their IQ, Southampton is no exception.
In Liverpool's case, David, they tend to be fellow employees of yours.
You conclude your post by asking:
"So what form should a response take?"
The answer, David, is that there should be no response, as Ronnie de Ramper comments on your post. Acknowledge the fact that Oldham Hall Street deliberately engineered a confrontation via its reporting & headlines when the issue first arose, & augmented it with pathetically parochial editorials once the flames had been kindled.
It would be refreshing if Oldham Hall Street posed some pertinent journalistic enquiries on the role of Peel Holdings & held its record up to a sufficiently rigorous level of scrutiny. How about it, David?
Or are you just going to Let It Be?
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Recriminations But No Regrets
No, just as I suspected, it was too much to hope that sanity would finally prevail over the Liverpool cruise terminal. Both the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo were at it again this morning. David Bartlett scratched around forlornly, half-heartedly sniffing at a scrap here, a bone there(http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/12/17/liverpool-city-leaders-continue-pier-head-cruise-terminal-ship-battle-100252-25411239/ ):
"One option may be to repay the £9m of public money which helped build the terminal and which has been judged an unfair advantage over competitors like Southampton.
"A private partner, such as a cruise company, could be sought to salvage the bid.
"It is understood the council may also seek clarification from European authorities about whether if the terminal were classed as a vital piece of transport infrastructure it could bypass competition rules."
Yes, I know, talk about clutching at straws. However, it's a theme on Oldham Hall Street, it appears, to talk up a scenario so improbable that you wonder if it had its genesis at the Christmas party after a few bevvies.
Bartlett's article quotes Joe Anderson, leader of the city's Labour group, declaring that the decision by government minister Paul Clark shows he's "living in 'cloud-cuckoo-land' ". Joe, I appreciate you want to displace a corrupt administration but siding with said characters, their friends in local commerce & Oldham Hall Street does you no credit whatsoever.
Bartlett's piece also contains this gem which only feeds into the self-pitying Scouse stereotype:
"Tourism leader Cllr Gary Millar said: 'My own view from a political point of view is that once again the Labour Government has snubbed Liverpool.'
"He said it was too early to start talking about a legal challenge to the Government's decision."
In other words, there are no grounds for a legal challenge & Cllr Millar's use of the "too early" to say argument unsuccessfully tries to disguise it. Then again, let us not forget that Cllr Millar has form when it comes to bombast, spin & chutzpah; some of us recall his worried, pespiring presence at the PR fiasco for One Parked Here Without Our Say-So(http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/08/hugs-from-mugs.html ).
The editorialising on Oldham Hall Street was in full cry, too, with the Oldham Echo leading the charge like a tired & emotional scally on Dale Street at 2am(http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2009/12/17/keep-liverpool-s-pier-head-cruise-liner-dreams-alive-100252-25410778/ ), vowing to anyone who wanted to know that the decision "should not be regarded as the end of the matter.
"We have been defeated, but we should remain defiant and keep afloat our long-term plans to further develop our much-envied, world-class waterfront."
Ah yes, "our much-envied, world-class waterfront" which has been hideously disfigured by the arrival of the eyesores, a development applauded at every stage by those on Oldham Hall Street whose parrot-like cries that more buildings, any buildings, no matter how they look, on the waterfront, equate "progress", making a mockery of the port's World Heritage Status; Big Al Machray & Bill Gleeson, both much loved & respected by their colleagues, I'm told, bear a fair deal of culpability for this act of civic vandalism.
Nowhere in the Echo's swaggering & defiant yell of resistance to reality is there even the hint of an acknowledgement that allowing £9m of European money to be used for an upgraded terminal would have been tantamount to an illegal subsidy.
The Daily Ghost's editorial, written by William Leece, strikes a less populist tone than that of its strident sibling. However, it's still in denial about the inherent flaws in the terminal plans. It concludes (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/views/liverpool-daily-post/2009/12/17/comment-time-for-round-two-in-the-fight-to-upgrade-the-cruise-liner-terminal-92534-25410308/ ):
"Even if the worst comes to the worst, perhaps it may be still be best to repay the £9m in Euro-support and have done with it."
However, let's not end on such a dispirited note. Let's hear it from the Oldham Echo to bellow one last cry of parochial protest:
"No one can deny us our proud maritime history, and no one should underestimate our determination to bring back the glory days."
All together now, "In my Liverpool home, in my Liverpool home...."
"One option may be to repay the £9m of public money which helped build the terminal and which has been judged an unfair advantage over competitors like Southampton.
"A private partner, such as a cruise company, could be sought to salvage the bid.
"It is understood the council may also seek clarification from European authorities about whether if the terminal were classed as a vital piece of transport infrastructure it could bypass competition rules."
Yes, I know, talk about clutching at straws. However, it's a theme on Oldham Hall Street, it appears, to talk up a scenario so improbable that you wonder if it had its genesis at the Christmas party after a few bevvies.
Bartlett's article quotes Joe Anderson, leader of the city's Labour group, declaring that the decision by government minister Paul Clark shows he's "living in 'cloud-cuckoo-land' ". Joe, I appreciate you want to displace a corrupt administration but siding with said characters, their friends in local commerce & Oldham Hall Street does you no credit whatsoever.
Bartlett's piece also contains this gem which only feeds into the self-pitying Scouse stereotype:
"Tourism leader Cllr Gary Millar said: 'My own view from a political point of view is that once again the Labour Government has snubbed Liverpool.'
"He said it was too early to start talking about a legal challenge to the Government's decision."
In other words, there are no grounds for a legal challenge & Cllr Millar's use of the "too early" to say argument unsuccessfully tries to disguise it. Then again, let us not forget that Cllr Millar has form when it comes to bombast, spin & chutzpah; some of us recall his worried, pespiring presence at the PR fiasco for One Parked Here Without Our Say-So(http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/08/hugs-from-mugs.html ).
The editorialising on Oldham Hall Street was in full cry, too, with the Oldham Echo leading the charge like a tired & emotional scally on Dale Street at 2am(http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2009/12/17/keep-liverpool-s-pier-head-cruise-liner-dreams-alive-100252-25410778/ ), vowing to anyone who wanted to know that the decision "should not be regarded as the end of the matter.
"We have been defeated, but we should remain defiant and keep afloat our long-term plans to further develop our much-envied, world-class waterfront."
Ah yes, "our much-envied, world-class waterfront" which has been hideously disfigured by the arrival of the eyesores, a development applauded at every stage by those on Oldham Hall Street whose parrot-like cries that more buildings, any buildings, no matter how they look, on the waterfront, equate "progress", making a mockery of the port's World Heritage Status; Big Al Machray & Bill Gleeson, both much loved & respected by their colleagues, I'm told, bear a fair deal of culpability for this act of civic vandalism.
Nowhere in the Echo's swaggering & defiant yell of resistance to reality is there even the hint of an acknowledgement that allowing £9m of European money to be used for an upgraded terminal would have been tantamount to an illegal subsidy.
The Daily Ghost's editorial, written by William Leece, strikes a less populist tone than that of its strident sibling. However, it's still in denial about the inherent flaws in the terminal plans. It concludes (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/views/liverpool-daily-post/2009/12/17/comment-time-for-round-two-in-the-fight-to-upgrade-the-cruise-liner-terminal-92534-25410308/ ):
"Even if the worst comes to the worst, perhaps it may be still be best to repay the £9m in Euro-support and have done with it."
However, let's not end on such a dispirited note. Let's hear it from the Oldham Echo to bellow one last cry of parochial protest:
"No one can deny us our proud maritime history, and no one should underestimate our determination to bring back the glory days."
All together now, "In my Liverpool home, in my Liverpool home...."
Friday, April 10, 2009
Civic Shenanigans & A Mute Media
I don't normally reproduce points made in the comments section of blogs. However, I gladly make an exception in the case of a post by David Bartlett on his Dale Street Blues blog. The subject under scrutiny was the Steve Hurst affair. Bartlett reminded his readers of the case's details (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2009/04/liberal-democrat-steve-hurst-f.html#more ):
"Hurst was convicted of delivering a leaflet titled 'Walton Scab,' attacking sitting Labour councillor Pauline Walton and her firefighter husband Keith in December.
"Masquerading as a leaflet from The United Socialist Party (TUSP), the pink flyer accused Mr Walton of crossing a Fire Brigades Union picket line during a strike.
"Mrs Walton was accused of leaving council meetings early to learn lap dancing. And it said Mr Walton was so unpopular at Lee Park golf course he couldn't find a playing partner."
The ludicrous allegations against Mr & Mrs Walton nothwithstanding, it should also be noted that there is no such party as The United Socialist Party.
One of the commenters, calling himself Henry, posted a response which merits full quotation:
"How very sad that once again the Echo has seen fit to bury this story in a small column on page 5. No photograph and even using light grey typeface for the tiny headline. I believe you, Mr Bartlett, to be a man of integrity and responsibility. I am sorry to say that the Echo and, now it seems to a growing extent, the Daily Post no longer has any of these qualities and I wish you luck in the future.
"The Echo's treatment of this story tonight [April 8th] is a disgrace. Considering that this is not only an elected representative of the people of Wavertree, he is not just any ward councillor, but an Executive Board Member whose position was held open for him by by his personal friend and fellow fire-fighter, the leader of the city [council], Councillor [Warren] Bradley. This man was in a key decision-making decision on the Executive Board and the story merited significant prominence in the main newspaper of the city. I don't question the front page human interest lead about the little girl's recovery after the horrifying fall [in an accident at Liverpool One], but it is an astonishing editorial decision to try to hide the outcome of this appeal and the further comments from the judiciary from the people of the city. This casts further serious doubt about the whole journalistic integrity of our local newspapers. In fact, there is no longer any doubt when it comes to reporting local politics.
"There are serious questions to be asked about other individuals' possible involvement here, for example, was Mr Hurst acting alone in this stupid and malicious venture, or was this a joint decision to engage in these dirty tricks a fellow fire-fighter and an opposition councillor? The 100% support from the leader of the Lib Dems is breath-taking and an appalling example that does the reputation of the city no good.
"This is in spite of two court judgements, both expressed with absolute certainty, about the guilty verdict and the reprehensible behaviour which discredits both his party and politicians.
"Both papers have continued to portray Mr Hurst as a victim and ignored the indignity and outrageous smears against the Waltons. This is particularly so in the Echo. You now report that Mr Hurst wants to draw a line under this and put his and his family's life back together. I am sure he does, perhaps so that he can get back on the Executive Board, like [Councillor Mike] Storey was allowed to following his no choice resignation which probably averted an even more damning report by the Standards Board following the Henshaw affair.
"There is only one honourable course of action here. First, an apology from Mr Bradley, and an apology to the electorate of Wavertree and the city, and the same from Mr Hurst to his ward members, the electors in Wavertree and this should be accompanied by his resignation as a councillor.
"I would also suggest that the editors of the Echo and the Daily Post consider their positions if they are either unable, unwilling, or not free to report on the politics of the city they allegedly hold so dear. There are currently at least two major local political stories that you are sitting on. Has journalism been shanghaied? Will it be left to the bloggers, or does anyone in Oldham Hall Street have the guts to say what's happening in the city? What, or who, are you all afraid of upsetting?"
Phew! Talk about killing two birds with one stone. ("Oldham Hall Street" LOL!) Henry, I tip my hat to you!
"Hurst was convicted of delivering a leaflet titled 'Walton Scab,' attacking sitting Labour councillor Pauline Walton and her firefighter husband Keith in December.
"Masquerading as a leaflet from The United Socialist Party (TUSP), the pink flyer accused Mr Walton of crossing a Fire Brigades Union picket line during a strike.
"Mrs Walton was accused of leaving council meetings early to learn lap dancing. And it said Mr Walton was so unpopular at Lee Park golf course he couldn't find a playing partner."
The ludicrous allegations against Mr & Mrs Walton nothwithstanding, it should also be noted that there is no such party as The United Socialist Party.
One of the commenters, calling himself Henry, posted a response which merits full quotation:
"How very sad that once again the Echo has seen fit to bury this story in a small column on page 5. No photograph and even using light grey typeface for the tiny headline. I believe you, Mr Bartlett, to be a man of integrity and responsibility. I am sorry to say that the Echo and, now it seems to a growing extent, the Daily Post no longer has any of these qualities and I wish you luck in the future.
"The Echo's treatment of this story tonight [April 8th] is a disgrace. Considering that this is not only an elected representative of the people of Wavertree, he is not just any ward councillor, but an Executive Board Member whose position was held open for him by by his personal friend and fellow fire-fighter, the leader of the city [council], Councillor [Warren] Bradley. This man was in a key decision-making decision on the Executive Board and the story merited significant prominence in the main newspaper of the city. I don't question the front page human interest lead about the little girl's recovery after the horrifying fall [in an accident at Liverpool One], but it is an astonishing editorial decision to try to hide the outcome of this appeal and the further comments from the judiciary from the people of the city. This casts further serious doubt about the whole journalistic integrity of our local newspapers. In fact, there is no longer any doubt when it comes to reporting local politics.
"There are serious questions to be asked about other individuals' possible involvement here, for example, was Mr Hurst acting alone in this stupid and malicious venture, or was this a joint decision to engage in these dirty tricks a fellow fire-fighter and an opposition councillor? The 100% support from the leader of the Lib Dems is breath-taking and an appalling example that does the reputation of the city no good.
"This is in spite of two court judgements, both expressed with absolute certainty, about the guilty verdict and the reprehensible behaviour which discredits both his party and politicians.
"Both papers have continued to portray Mr Hurst as a victim and ignored the indignity and outrageous smears against the Waltons. This is particularly so in the Echo. You now report that Mr Hurst wants to draw a line under this and put his and his family's life back together. I am sure he does, perhaps so that he can get back on the Executive Board, like [Councillor Mike] Storey was allowed to following his no choice resignation which probably averted an even more damning report by the Standards Board following the Henshaw affair.
"There is only one honourable course of action here. First, an apology from Mr Bradley, and an apology to the electorate of Wavertree and the city, and the same from Mr Hurst to his ward members, the electors in Wavertree and this should be accompanied by his resignation as a councillor.
"I would also suggest that the editors of the Echo and the Daily Post consider their positions if they are either unable, unwilling, or not free to report on the politics of the city they allegedly hold so dear. There are currently at least two major local political stories that you are sitting on. Has journalism been shanghaied? Will it be left to the bloggers, or does anyone in Oldham Hall Street have the guts to say what's happening in the city? What, or who, are you all afraid of upsetting?"
Phew! Talk about killing two birds with one stone. ("Oldham Hall Street" LOL!) Henry, I tip my hat to you!
Friday, July 31, 2009
A "Legacy" Issue From Culture Year
Wasn't culture year great? We had Ringo on the roof as part of his £90,000 stay in the city, courtesy of Phil Redmond & his "clever" expense system of payment for the drummer from the Dingle. Pity about that Jonathan Ross business a few days later, but there you go.
And then, of course, there was Macca's concert, you know, the one that was billed as Liverpool Sound, featuring Sir Thumbs-Up himself, The Zutons &, er, Leeds' Kaiserchiefs, &, er, that was it. Pity it didn't go ahead, as planned, at the Salthouse Dock, drained of water, fish humanely stunned for the duration & then returned to their dockside home. Hence the venue change of Anfield, with its narrow access roads, decidedly threadbare nearby ameneties & inconvenienced local residents.
Well, it's all history now, the unsold DVDs acting as useful coasters at the 08 Place on Whitechapel.
Ah, yes, the 08 Place; what, you may ask, is it used for, now that the greatest year in the history of the city (copyright, Oldham Echo) has passed into the footnotes section of the record books?
Well, not even the city's Lib Dem misrulers can ignore that poser any longer (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2009/07/30/liverpool-council-inquiry-into-08-place-tourist-information-centre-92534-24273501/ ), & all credit to David Bartlett -- one of the few journos on Oldham Hall Street to hold the banner of serious journalism aloft -- for turning over the stone on this unedifying spectacle:
"The rent on the 08Place is £220,000 a year and its high-tech TV screens cost £60,000 to run annually.
"Controversially, the council signed a 10-year lease on the Whitechapel building which does not expire until November 2013, and has an option to extend it until 2018."
Anything involving the city council wouldn't be complete without an element of farce, & on this occasion it's supplied by the decision to appoint Richard Kemp as the inquiry's head. Yes, that Richard Kemp; the Richard Kemp who, as the city council's executive member for housing, was supposed to oversee the transformation of the notorious Boot Estate in Norris Green. When the transformation failed to materialise, even the Echo fingered Kemp as being at fault & he was obliged to quit. Speaking to the Guardian at the time, Kemp tried to explain himself, but ended up offering a hostage to fortune (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/may/28/regeneration.communities ):
"We were overtaken by events, particularly the rise in land values and house prices, which went up 40% in two years in Liverpool. But I'm confident that in five years [2008] there will be a first-class estate built by a unique public-private venture."
So much for the farce, now for the corruption. Bartlett reports:
"[The 08 Place] has been controversial from the start after the £1.4m Neighbourhood Renewal Fund -- cash intended to help regenerate the city's poorest areas -- was used to help pay for the £2.2m fit-out and furnishing of the building.
"When concerns were raised in February, 2005, then council leader Mike Storey insisted: 'This will not be a cost on the council tax payer.'
"Months later, a council report revealed the 08 Place would notch up a deficit of £161,000 a year, a total of £800,000 between then and 2010."
Bartlett also relates:
"A website, the Liverpool Evil Cabal, fuelled speculation by levelling a number of unsubstantiated accusations at senior council officials over business dealings."
The Evil Cabal website blew the lid off the corruption going on within the council during the run-up to culture year. It's claims were largely ignored by the local media. Occasionally, it would be dismissed as lurid fiction in the space of a single paragraph on the inside pages of the Echo. Its claims are now being vindicated, as the local media grudgingly admits.
Kemp says the inquiry won't go over the past, which will come as welcome news to Councillor Storey, I'm sure. He also admitted he didn't know whether the 08 Place is an asset or a liability to the city. What an indictment of the Lib-Dem reign in Liverpool!
He's even reduced to musing:
"Could [the 08 Place] be a showcase for Liverpool products?"
A showcase for local products? At £220,000 per annum? Value for money, wouldn't you say? The council tax payers should be delighted.
And then, of course, there was Macca's concert, you know, the one that was billed as Liverpool Sound, featuring Sir Thumbs-Up himself, The Zutons &, er, Leeds' Kaiserchiefs, &, er, that was it. Pity it didn't go ahead, as planned, at the Salthouse Dock, drained of water, fish humanely stunned for the duration & then returned to their dockside home. Hence the venue change of Anfield, with its narrow access roads, decidedly threadbare nearby ameneties & inconvenienced local residents.
Well, it's all history now, the unsold DVDs acting as useful coasters at the 08 Place on Whitechapel.
Ah, yes, the 08 Place; what, you may ask, is it used for, now that the greatest year in the history of the city (copyright, Oldham Echo) has passed into the footnotes section of the record books?
Well, not even the city's Lib Dem misrulers can ignore that poser any longer (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2009/07/30/liverpool-council-inquiry-into-08-place-tourist-information-centre-92534-24273501/ ), & all credit to David Bartlett -- one of the few journos on Oldham Hall Street to hold the banner of serious journalism aloft -- for turning over the stone on this unedifying spectacle:
"The rent on the 08Place is £220,000 a year and its high-tech TV screens cost £60,000 to run annually.
"Controversially, the council signed a 10-year lease on the Whitechapel building which does not expire until November 2013, and has an option to extend it until 2018."
Anything involving the city council wouldn't be complete without an element of farce, & on this occasion it's supplied by the decision to appoint Richard Kemp as the inquiry's head. Yes, that Richard Kemp; the Richard Kemp who, as the city council's executive member for housing, was supposed to oversee the transformation of the notorious Boot Estate in Norris Green. When the transformation failed to materialise, even the Echo fingered Kemp as being at fault & he was obliged to quit. Speaking to the Guardian at the time, Kemp tried to explain himself, but ended up offering a hostage to fortune (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/may/28/regeneration.communities ):
"We were overtaken by events, particularly the rise in land values and house prices, which went up 40% in two years in Liverpool. But I'm confident that in five years [2008] there will be a first-class estate built by a unique public-private venture."
So much for the farce, now for the corruption. Bartlett reports:
"[The 08 Place] has been controversial from the start after the £1.4m Neighbourhood Renewal Fund -- cash intended to help regenerate the city's poorest areas -- was used to help pay for the £2.2m fit-out and furnishing of the building.
"When concerns were raised in February, 2005, then council leader Mike Storey insisted: 'This will not be a cost on the council tax payer.'
"Months later, a council report revealed the 08 Place would notch up a deficit of £161,000 a year, a total of £800,000 between then and 2010."
Bartlett also relates:
"A website, the Liverpool Evil Cabal, fuelled speculation by levelling a number of unsubstantiated accusations at senior council officials over business dealings."
The Evil Cabal website blew the lid off the corruption going on within the council during the run-up to culture year. It's claims were largely ignored by the local media. Occasionally, it would be dismissed as lurid fiction in the space of a single paragraph on the inside pages of the Echo. Its claims are now being vindicated, as the local media grudgingly admits.
Kemp says the inquiry won't go over the past, which will come as welcome news to Councillor Storey, I'm sure. He also admitted he didn't know whether the 08 Place is an asset or a liability to the city. What an indictment of the Lib-Dem reign in Liverpool!
He's even reduced to musing:
"Could [the 08 Place] be a showcase for Liverpool products?"
A showcase for local products? At £220,000 per annum? Value for money, wouldn't you say? The council tax payers should be delighted.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Liverpool Waters Will Sink The City
A hitherto imposed "concensus" has started to crack since the Oldham Echo was moved to acknowledge the other side of the argument over the future of the city's north docks (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/01/24/unesco-calls-for-change-to-liverpool-waters-scheme-to-protect-city-s-world-heritage-site-status-100252-30187372/ ).
David Bartlett's piece was keen to stress that "the report does not say what will happen to the city's WHS status if no changes are made to the [Liverpool Waters] project."
Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson popped up to say that he wanted both the Liverpool Waters scheme & a continuation of the waterfront's World Heritage Status. Given Cllr Anderson's belief that he can lead a Labour council whilst inflicting Tory cuts on the people who elected him into office, such contradictory thinking shouldn't raise too many eyebrows.
What was refreshingly different, however, about Bartlett's article was the nature of the online comments. True, there were the usual suspects (Peel trolls?) who called for WHS status to be dumped (Mogger1: "World Heritage Site, time to move on, I think, we have bigger fish to fry." & SteMcK83: "Get it built and let's become a 'Champions League City' for others to admire." To which one can only respond that the scheme would relegate the city to League One status.)
That said, other commenters refused to toe the Echo/Peel line (L_12: "There is no demand for these buildings/office space. A fancy view of the city of Liverpool will not be a consideration in whether companies seek to invest here.....When the business plan fails it will become derelict, run down and a terrible eyesore. If this project is not a success, it will not only blight the city but become a massive expense to the taxpayer for generations to come." & olderndwise: "If an apartment in the new developments is let then an apartment elsewhere in the city will become vacant. If one of the new offices is let then an office elsewhere in the city will become vacant. If someone is frequenting one of the new bars then they will not be frequenting an existing one.")
That latter point is unarguable in its logic.
Bartlett followed up his article with one the following day (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/01/25/unesco-inspectors-attack-liverpool-waters-scheme-100252-30193588/ )which contained this damning observation:
"THE Three Graces would play 'second violin' to the huge £5.5bn Liverpool Waters development if it is approved, Unesco inspectors have warned.
"The inspectors also warned Liverpool's World Heritage Site would be 'damaged beyond repair' if the plan goes ahead."
There can be little doubt that a World Heritage Site which is "damaged beyond repair" ceases to be one. Indeed that was, to all intents & purposes, confirmed by a Unsco inspector late last year (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/11/22/unesco-set-to-strip-liverpool-of-its-world-heritage-site-status-100252-29817930/ ).
The latest development in this saga comes with English Heritage's qualms over the scheme (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/feb/23/english-heritage-objection-liverpool-development ).
Helen Carter's report reminds us of Peel's gradiose vanity project: "It features thousands of flats and hundreds of offices, hotels and bars, as well as the 55-storey Shanghai Tower and other skyscrapers."
Just how Peel intends to find individuals & businesses willing to live & work in the aforementioned flats & offices has never been explained. In truth, it's an illusory business plan. The banks aren't lending to mortgage applicants (assuming they can afford a deposit) & small businesses are equally unhappy with the banks' parsimony. The current economic climate will prevail for at least another four or five years. Both Peel & the Oldham Echo know that, though they refuse to admit it.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Look Who's Back
It's been a while since David Bartlett posted on his Dale Street Blues blog (perhaps Mark Thomas pleaded with him not to dabble anymore with the curse of the blogosphere; it starts out as the occasional Tweet, then the tentative postings on Facebook, & before you know it, you're hooked, blogging from Oldham Hall Street really does screw you up).
Still, it's nice to see that David has spent his time away from the keyboard constructively, as evidenced by this cerebral offering: http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2010/02/poll-gives-new-meaning-to-a-we.html .
We're grateful to David for elevating the tone of local political discourse. Keep it up, David (ahem).
Still, it's nice to see that David has spent his time away from the keyboard constructively, as evidenced by this cerebral offering: http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2010/02/poll-gives-new-meaning-to-a-we.html .
We're grateful to David for elevating the tone of local political discourse. Keep it up, David (ahem).
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
Sharon Green's Disabled "Joke" -- The Fall-Out
David Bartlett acknowledges the gravity of the Sharon Green Facebook affair (well done, David, always up to speed, eh?) with a post on his blog today (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2010/06/a-facebook-campaign-has-been.html ).
To be fair, however, Bartlett also notes that a Facebook campaign has been launched, calling on Green to stand down as a councillor for St Michaels ward (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1217140578363735&v=wall# ).
It would be welcome if Green realised that her position is untenable & did the decent thing. Then again, decency isn't synonymous with the city's Fib Dems.
To be fair, however, Bartlett also notes that a Facebook campaign has been launched, calling on Green to stand down as a councillor for St Michaels ward (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1217140578363735&v=wall# ).
It would be welcome if Green realised that her position is untenable & did the decent thing. Then again, decency isn't synonymous with the city's Fib Dems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
